OSHA Mandate Headed for Supreme Court

[JoeB131]

A dishonest way of saying that you support the “right” to savagely kill an innocent child in cold blood.

Fetuses aren't children, Mormon Bob. Even when abortion was illegal, no one was charged with murder for having an abortion. (In fact, women were almost never charged for having abortions).

If you were to start charging abortion as "murder", then you would have to open 600,000 homicide investigations per year. By way of comparison, the number of homicides in the US (not counting 2020, which had a spike) is about 19,000 a year. Only 54% of those are cleared.

Now, if you guys on the right REALLY, REALLY wanted to reduce the number of abortions, there's a way to do that....

Universal health care.
Paid family leave
Comprehensive, religion-free, sex education in the schools.
Unfettered, guilt-free access to other forms of contraception.

This new mRNA shit is something totally different than genuine vaccines. It has never before been used on humans, and has never been tested to anything close to the degree that is necessary to prove that it is safe or effective. What empirical evidence is trickling in seems to show that it is neither safe or effective.

For those playing along at home... Mormon Bob totally believes that his Mormon Magic Underwear protects him from evil, but don't believe in mRNA vaccines, which are proven science.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

A dishonest way of saying that you support the “right” to savagely kill an innocent child in cold blood.

yer chosen one thought women should be punished & it depends on how the court is stacked. of course he backed off when it looked like that was a very unpopular opinion ... of course that was 5 years ago & the SC didn't have his 3 picks seated ... especially the last one - the hand maiden.

you claiming it's a 'child' is the real dishonesty here.

Denying the humanity of the most innocent and defenseless of all human beings puts you in the company of some of the most evil groups of people in the world, who also denied the very humanity of this that they wanted to persecute, abuse, and even murder.

And, yes, though some people shy away from saying what needs to be said, I will not.

Anyone who has any part in the willful murder of an unborn child should be put to death, just as any other hardcore murderer should.

The more innocent and defenseless the victim, the greater the evil in killing that victim, and the greater should be the consequences for doing so.

 

[JoeB131]

I don't give a crap when or why you started that...The mere fact that you would start it in the first place is just one more confirmation of what a low life, scumbag you really are...I have no further interest in interacting with you....Go to hell.

Just trying to give you some context.

Don't worry, some day you'll say something stupid enough where I'll give you your own funny nickname.

 

[JoeB131]

No valid comparison.

A drunk driver poses a genuine and significant risk to the safety and well-being of others.

All the lies and fearmongering notwithstanding, there is not even the faintest shred of evidence to support the claim that refusing to be injected with this dangerous experimental mRNA shit has any adverse impact on the safety or well-being of anyone other than the one making that choice.

We are losing 400,000 people a year to Covid.
We lose 10,511 people a year to drunk driving incidents (and this includes the drunks themselves.)

Yet look at all the resources we pour into interdiction of drunk driving. Now, frankly, we could solve the problem a lot better if we simply installed a breath lock on every car, but then we'd get some right winger screaming about "Freedom" or something.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

And I think a private company should be allowed to have that power.

What other power should a private company to have to discriminate against employees or prospective employees, or to violate the rights of those employees?

Should an employer be able to discriminate against me on the basis of my religious beliefs? My ethnic background? My political beliefs? The color of my skin? The color of my eyes?

What rights do I have, that are not subject to being held hostage to my need to earn an honest living?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Only if you are practicing your religion on their time

My medical choices take place on my own time. What makes them any more of my employer's business than my religion?

 

[JoeB131]

Denying the humanity of the most innocents and defenseless of all human beings puts you in the company of some of the most evil groups of people in the world, who also denied the very humanity of this that they wanted to persecute, abuse, and even murder.

Except, again, nobody was ever prosecuted for murder in the US for performing an abortion before Roe. v. Wade.

Even the Bible didn't treat the death of a fetus as murder.

22 “If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely[a] but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life,

Now, if you want to find a country that has what you want... look no further than the Philippines. Abortion is illegal except to save the life of the woman. Yet Filipinas have 500K - 800K abortions every year, in a country that is a lot more religious than this one is.

And, yes, though some people shy away from saying what needs to be said, I will not.

Anyone who has any part in the willful murder of an unborn child should be put to death, just as any other hardcore murderer should.

The more innocent and defenseless the victim, the greater the evil in killing that victim, and the greater should be the consequences for doing so.

Hey Mormon Bob, do you know what the only country that ever executed people for performing abortions was? Yup, Nazi Germany and it's various puppet states in World War II.

 

[Oddball]

And I think a private company should be allowed to have that power.



This is correct, you can tell your employer no and they can stop giving you a pay check. You both have a choice.

The faux lolbertarian mask falls off of the corporate oligarch.

 

[JoeB131]

What other power should a private company to have to discriminate against employees or prospective employees, or to violate the rights of those employees?

Should an employer be able to discriminate against me on the basis of my religious beliefs? My ethnic background? My political beliefs? The color of my skin? The color of my eyes?

What rights do I have, that are not subject to being held hostage to my need to earn an honest living?

Actually, your right to belong to your whackadoodle cult is protected by federal law... but then we also have "at-will" employment which allows your employer to fire you at any time for any reason.... or no reason at all.

And of course, if you spent your whole day trying to indoctrinate people into the Wisdom of Joseph Smith, your employer would probably fire you for being disruptive.

The fact is, employers have all sorts of mandates they can put on employees.
They can dictate what time they work, and demand overtime (unpaid if you are salaried)
They can make you pee in a little cup to make sure you aren't enjoying recreational substances.
They can dictate what kind of clothes you wear at work.

Let's not forget, that when those tornadoes hit the midwest last week, we are getting horror stories about how Amazon and that Candle Factory told people anyone who left would be fired.

Factory workers threatened with firing if they left before tornado, employees say

Exclusive: At least eight people died in the Mayfield Consumer Products candle factory. Its destruction has become a symbol of the tornado's ruinous power.

www.nbcnews.com

My medical choices take place on my own time. What makes them any more of my employer's business than my religion?

Well, the fact that you could come in and spread the disease to your coworkers would be kind of their business.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The faux lolbertarian mask falls off of the corporate oligarch.

This is very much the libertarian view, that a private company should be allowed to make their own rules. We think that anti-discrimination laws apply to the Govt, not to private entities.

The Govt should not make business decisions for private companies.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

What other power should a private company to have to discriminate against employees or prospective employees, or to violate the rights of those employees?

Should an employer be able to discriminate against me on the basis of my religious beliefs? My ethnic background? My political beliefs? The color of my skin? The color of my eyes?

What rights do I have, that are not subject to being held hostage to my need to earn an honest living?

In my opinion yes, an employer be able to discriminate against you for any of those reasons. You have no right to a specific job.

 

[JoeB131]

Wow, I really am living in Mormon Bob's head

These dangerous experimental drugs have been rather solidly proven, by now, to do nothing whatsoever as far as preventing anyone from being infected with this disease or spreading it to others.

So any argument that someone, by refusing to take part in this risky experiment, is posing any danger to anyone else, and is therefore a valid target to be discriminated against in any way, is just pure bullshit.

Except that 99% of the people who are dying from Covid are unvaccinated.

Staggering COVID-19 Statistic: 98% to 99% of Americans Dying are Unvaccinated - AU/UGA Medical Partnership

If you have decided to not get vaccinated against COVID-19, a new data analysis from The Associated Press concludes you may have a higher risk of dying compared to those who have chosen to be vaccinated. The analysis was released in May of 2021 and looks at COVID-19 related deaths in vaccinated...

medicalpartnership.usg.edu

Only the ignorant and gullible believe that this shit is, or ever was, about protecting anyone from any deadly disease.

Again, the guy who thinks that Magic Underwear is real doesn't believe in vaccines... too funny.

I would find it very amusing to see you take a firsthand role in trying to force someone to allow you to inject these dangerous experimental drugs into him. How many of your own teeth would you still have after that?

It's a lot easier to advocate the unjustifiable use of force against another, when you know that someone else will be doing it, with you being a safe distance away.

Wow, Mormon Bob, how is it you've made it this far in life without being charged with assault? Or are you all talk and no action?

Put a security guard at the front door. If you don't have a legit vax card... you don't get in. Period. Full stop.

 

[JoeB131]

Is Bruce Jenner a man or is he a woman?

Caitlyn Jenner is a woman, thanks for playing. Look, man, I'm not sure why you are so obsessed about this... Just because you picked up a tranny once, we all believe you have a case of the not-gays. Pay no attention to those scientific surveys that prove raging homophobes are latent homosexuals... I'm sure you are as straight as they come.

Employers are still legally obligated to obey the actual laws, including HIPAA and related laws that protect employees' rights to medical privacy and control over their own medical care. Obeying these illegal mandates will not shield employers from the consequences of violating the actual laws.

Nope.

HIPAA, COVID-19 Vaccination, and the Workplace

HHS issued guidance on how HIPAA applies to disclosures and requests by employers about whether a person received a COVID-19 vaccine.

www.hhs.gov

1. Does the HIPAA Privacy Rule prohibit businesses or individuals from asking whether their customers or clients have received a COVID-19 vaccine?

No. The Privacy Rule2 does not prohibit any person (e.g., an individual or an entity such as a business), including HIPAA covered entities and business associates, from asking whether an individual has received a particular vaccine, including COVID-19 vaccines.

First, the Privacy Rule3 applies only to covered entities4 (health plans, health care clearinghouses, and health care providers that conduct standard electronic transactions) and, to some extent, their business associates.5

 

[JoeB131]

The Federal government has no authority to force people to put chemicals in their body, Walter.

Except they have for years, guy. Which is why little Timmy can't go to a public or even a private school unless he's had all his vaccinations.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Well, the fact that you could come in and spread the disease to your coworkers would be kind of their business.

At this point, the empirical proof is that being injected with these dangerous experimental drugs does not, in the least bit, reduce one's chances of being infected with the virus, nor of spreading it to others. At best, they may reduce the symptoms in those who are infected after recently receiving these drugs, but even that effect is now found to fad very quickly, hence the claimed need for endless booster shots.

If anything, the use of these drugs increases the risk of spreading the disease, since someone with milder symptoms or no symptoms at all is less likely to realize that he is infected, more likely to go about work or other normal activities, and more likely to infect others.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Caitlyn Jenner is a woman…

In other words, then, you have no credibility whatsoever with regard to anything having to do with any kind of science. Certainly not with anything having anything to do with human biology.

 

[JoeB131]

At this point, the empirical proof is that being injected with these dangerous experimental drugs does not, in the least bit, reduce one's chances of being infected with the virus, nor of spreading it to others. At best, they may reduce the symptoms in those who are infected after recently receiving these drugs, but even that effect is now found to fad very quickly, hence the claimed need for endless booster shots.

If anything, the use of these drugs increases the risk of spreading the disease, since someone with milder symptoms or no symptoms at all is less likely to realize that he is infected, more likely to go about work or other normal activities, and more likely to infect others.

Except if everyone is vaccinated, spreading the disease is moot point.

98% of people who are dying of Covid right now are unvaccinated... this resistance to vaccination is what is making matters worse, not the vaccinations themselves.

The other is that people are pretty much going about their business like there is no covid. Other than still seeing masks in some public places, we've more or less gotten back to normal.

In other words, then, you have no credibility whatsoever with regard to anything having to do with any kind of science. Certainly not with anything having anything to do with human biology.

Actually, Gender Dysphoria is scientifically recognized as a sexual orientation.

Gender Dysphoria

Gender dysphoria (formerly known as gender identity disorder in the fourth version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM) is defined by strong, persistent feelings of identification with another gender and discomfort with one's own assigned gender and sex; in order...

www.psychologytoday.com

 

[task0778]

In my opinion yes, an employer be able to discriminate against you for any of those reasons. You have no right to a specific job.

Gotta part company with you there, GG. We shouldn't be going back to the days of segregation and favoritism. No one has a right to a job, but neither should an employer have the right to discriminate against somebody based on the factors listed in the 4th Amendment. Do we really want to go back to the way it was prior to Rosa Parks? I for one believe in each person's rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and no employer should have the legal ability to interfere with that based on nothing more than a discriminating factor.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Gotta part company with you there, GG. We shouldn't be going back to the days of segregation and favoritism. No one has a right to a job, but neither should an employer have the right to discriminate against somebody based on the factors listed in the 4th Amendment. Do we really want to go back to the way it was prior to Rosa Parks? I for one believe in each person's rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and no employer should have the legal ability to interfere with that based on nothing more than a discriminating factor.

I understand why it was done, but I still do not think the Constitution actually allows it.

When you speak of person's rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, you seem to not include the employer in that.

I also personally do not think we would go back to those days, I think a company that tried it would find themselves very quickly without customers. But perhaps I would be wrong

 

[task0778]

When you speak of person's rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, you seem to not include the employer in that.

Nope, not saying that. But an employer's rights do not supersede anyone else's either.